Bennet, Henry
, earl of Arlington, was descended from an ancient family, and was second son of sir John Bennet of Arlington in Middlesex, by Dorothy, daughter of sir John Crofts of Saxham in the county of Norfolk. He was born in 1618, and educated at Christ-church in the university of Oxford, where he took the degree of master of arts, and distinguished himself by his poetical compositions, several of which were occasionally inserted in books of verses published under the name of the university, and in others in that time. In the beginning the civil war, when king Charles I. fixed his chief residence at Oxford, he was appointed under-secretary to lord George Digby, secretary of state; and afterwards entered himself as a volunteer in the royal cause, and served very bravely, especially at the sharp encounter near Andover in Hampshire, where he received several wounds. When the wars were ended, he did not leave the king, when success did, but attended his interest in foreign parts; and, in order to qualify himself the better for his majesty’s service, travelled into Italy, and made his observations on the several countries and states of Europe. He was afterwards made secretary to James, duke of York, and received the honour of knighthood from king Charles II. at Bruges in March, 1658, and was soon after sent envoy to the court of Spain; in which negociation he acted with so much prudence and success, that his majesty, upon his return to England, soon called him home, and made him keeper of his privy purse. On the 2d of October, 1662, he was appointed principal | secretary of state in the room of sir Edward Nicholas; but by this preferment some advances were evidently made towards the interest of Rome; since the new secretary was one who secretly espoused the cause of popery, and had much influenced the king towards embracing-that religion, the year before his restoration, at Fontarabia on Which‘ account he had been so much threatened by lord Culpepper, that it was believed he durst not return into England, till after the death of that nobleman.
In March 14, 1664, he was advanced to the degree of a baron, by the title of Lord Arlington of Arlington in Middlesex, and in 1670, was one of the cabinet council, distinguished by the title of the Cabal*, and one of those ministers, who advised the shutting up of the exchequer. April 22, 1672, he was created viscount Thetford and earl of Arlington and on the 15th of June following, was made knight of the garter. On the 22d of the same month he was sent to Utrecht, with the duke of Buckingham and lord Hallifax, as ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, to meet jointly with such as should be appointed by the king of France, and with the deputies from the States-General, but this negociation had no great effect. In April 1673, he was appointed one of the three plenipotentiaries from the court of Great Britain to Cologne, in order to mediate a peace between the emperor and king of France. In January following, the house of commons resolving to attack him, as well as the dukes of Lauderdale and Buckingham, who were likewise members of the Cabal, the last endeavoured to clear himself by casting all the odium upon the earl of Arlington; who being admitted to make his defence in that house, answered some parts of the duke of Buckingham’s speech, but was so far from giving them satisfaction with regard to his own conduct, that they immediately drew up articles of impeachment against him, in which he was charged to have been a constant and vehement promoter of popery and popish councils; to have been guilty of many undue practices in order to promote his own greatness; to have embezzled and wasted the treasure of the nation; and to have falsely
This name was composed of the initial letters of their titles, viz. Clifford, Ashley (afterwards Shaftesbury), Buckingham, Arlington, Lauderdale. Tuey had all of them great presents from France, besides what was openly given them. The French ambassador gave each of them a picture of the king of France, set in diamonds, to the value of 3,000l.
He was, according to bishop Burnet, a proud man; and his parts were solid, but not quick. He had the art of observing the king’s temper, and managing it beyond all the men of that time. He was believed a papist, for he had once professed it, and at his death again reconciletl himself to the church of Rome. Yet in the whole course of his ministry, he seemed to have made it a maxim, that the king ought to shew no favour to popery, since all his. affairs would be ruined, if ever he turned that way: which made the papists become his mortal enemies, and accuse him as an apostate, and the betrayer of their interests. His character is drawn by Mr. Macpherson, in his History of Great Britain, with conciseness, spirit, and justice. *’ Arlington supplied the place of extensive talents by an artful management of such as he possessed. Accommodating in his principles, and easy in his address, he pleased when he was known to deceive; and his manner acquired to him a kind of influence where he commanded no respect. He was little calculated for bold measures, on account of his natural timidity; and that defect created an opinion of his moderation, that was ascribed to virtue. His facility to adopt new measures was forgotten in his readiness to acknowledge the errors of the old. The deficiency of his integrity was forgiven in the decency of his dishonesty. Too weak not to be superstitious, yet possessing too much sense to own his adherence to the church of Rome, he lived a Protestant, in his outward profession; but he died a Catholic. Timidity was the chief | characteristie of his mind; and that being known, he was even commanded by cowards. He was the man of the least genius of the parry; but he had most experience in that slow and constant current of business, which perhaps, suits affairs of state better than the violent exertions of men of great parts." 1
Biog. Brit, a very prolix and elaborate panegyric defence of lord Arlington, ingenious indeed, but partial beyond all evidence of fact. We have preferred following Dr. Birch in the above sketch. Those who wish to investigate his lordship’s character more minutely, must consult Dr. Campbell’s account as corrected in the last edition of the Biog. Brit. See also the third volume of Clarendon’s State Papers, Supplement, p. 80—84.